Search

Objectives: To evaluate clinical outcomes of fluoroscopic removal of retrievable self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) for malignant oesophageal strictures, to compare clinical outcomes of three different removal techniques, and to identify predictive factors of successful removal by the standard technique (primary technical success).Methods: A total of 137 stents were removed from 128 patients with malignant oesophageal strictures. Primary overall technical success and removal-related complications were evaluated. Logistic regression models were constructed to identify predictive factors of primary technical success.Results: Primary technical success rate was 78.8 % (108/137). Complications occurred in six (4.4 %) cases. Stent location in the upper oesophagus (P=0.004), stricture length over 8 cm (P=0.030), and proximal granulation tissue (P<0.001) were negative predictive factors of primary technical success. If granulation tissue was present at the proximal end, eversion technique was more frequently required (P=0.002).Conclusions: Fluoroscopic removal of retrievable SEMSs for malignant oesophageal strictures using three different removal techniques appeared to be safe and easy. The standard technique is safe and effective in the majority of patients. The presence of proximal granulation tissue, stent location in the upper oesophagus, and stricture length over 8 cm were negative predictive factors for primary technical success by standard extraction and may require a modified removal technique.Key Points: • Fluoroscopic retrievable SEMS removal is safe and effective. • Standard removal technique by traction is effective in the majority of patients. • Three negative predictive factors of primary technical success were identified. • Caution should be exercised during the removal in those situations. • Eversion technique is effective in cases of proximal granulation tissue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To validate 4D flow MRI in a flow phantom using a flowmeter and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) as reference.Methods: Validation of 4D flow MRI was performed using flow phantoms with 75 % and 90 % stenosis. The effect of spatial resolution on flow rate, peak velocity and flow patterns was investigated in coronal and axial scans. The accuracy of flow rate with 4D flow MRI was evaluated using a flowmeter as reference, and the peak velocity and flow patterns obtained were compared with CFD analysis results.Results: 4D flow MRI accurately measured the flow rate in proximal and distal regions of the stenosis (percent error ≤3.6 % in axial scanning with 1.6-mm resolution). The peak velocity of 4D flow MRI was underestimated by more than 22.8 %, especially from the second half of the stenosis. With 1-mm isotropic resolution, the maximum thickness of the recirculating flow region was estimated within a 1-mm difference, but the turbulent velocity fluctuations mostly disappeared in the post-stenotic region.Conclusion: 4D flow MRI accurately measures the flow rates in the proximal and distal regions of a stenosis in axial scan but has limitations in its estimation of peak velocity and turbulent characteristics.Key Points: • 4D flow MRI accurately measures the flow rate in axial scan. • The peak velocity was underestimated by 4D flow MRI. •4D flow MRI demonstrates the principal pattern of post-stenotic flow. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]